The Hawaiian gazette., 1887-06-14


shove set forth, the said variapceS BE-
inS the same vauaness mentioned
above which are hereby referred To-
After argument the motion wGs
overrulei. and the defendant duly
excepted.
The defendant Introduced evidence
but did not himself testify.
The ATTORNEY General N ms clos
ing address 10 the jury SGld. = Inst
the alleged theft had been testified q,
Snd the receipt q the money by Nc
Gifin testified 70, and that trenSlned
urcontradictei. s. defendant MctSlT-
IN did not see n 70 take the witness
stand and deny He wSS here N
te-rupte3 by the Court. and tae de
fsndsns noted an exception % these
remarks,
The C5ur. charged the Jury,
G.5-, To bring in q yer,.lc5 " 1oc
guilty against AIcIlaln en- the lrSc
count. ana anon the second count 10
md & va-licc according To their view
os the testimony.
The Co1rc also instructed the 5E-y
-hz- il they should md the DEFEND
ant guilty upon tEe second count,
tlay should alSo ma whether the
value Of the stolen property received
by the defendant was Of the vGlle Of
more rlSC one hundred dollars
The Jury found ve-ilc- clar me
defendant VS. guilty q receiving
stolen goods q s value q over >lt,
III returned no vsrCiIc5 or the ErS-
Punt
The defendant excepted 20 the ye--
diet On The ground That II was con
crary % the law snd Che evidence n
t1ar there WIS no eE3eCca To warrant
the verdict. and that Il did not con
plv with the law OF the case nor with
the Judges charge.
Inc case was argueG az some
length. Grd II Was s-Ee1U0CS-v son
tended on behalf Of the defendant.
char MS cC-ieEeCdarc was an InccD-
pececr witness 3 he Vas the p--c--
psi te-1-, and vls 11lzDc1S-
N support o -Lass propositions
counsel czIed: l G-eaclsaf on -Ev.
s So. S12. 81 People y WhspV-1
3 C0wen 70T Rex - IEnes !
Moody &C 81
With regard e tie ilsl slllGeacl0u
81 the witness On me ground o. II
fanny. our statute declares that the
only crimes which l-SlUalltv s Tl--
neSs are perjury ana subo-la-lor OF
perjury. 50 without dissenting from
the various authorities cited II sup
pC-- OF this proposition. ana winch
DO n05 apply % the case before u, We
must hold that the objection ! nor
ce-ao-e-
A. to the point Of the lre0Dpe5ency
OF the witness u being the principal
te-1-. We need only 70 refer 10 the
citations from GraenleaE Sec. sos tla5
final judgment must be pronounced
agairsr him. or he must have pleaded
guilty. aud V-hzr10ns An Cr- Law 2
IS the thief : competent 70 prove
The larceny. % decide this point
against the defendant
TIE Defendants colcs5- objects 10
the testimony Is 10 the Conversations
overheard between hin and Nee hes
nev his e1-daEsElz1r AZ the Police
0t-ce a. being confessions made IN
der the influence O q promise or II
11csnsrr ID confess. made 70 he
Chesnev and > operating upon the
defendants mind. and also 10 the evi-
6snee Of McChasney himself on the
ground thae he had been induced u
confess under 8 promise OF favor
Many authorities we're cited N De
half Of the defendant 70 show that tie
confessions q one defendant could
n0- Dc received - evidence against
his co defendant and that confession.
made under threats OF q promise 1-
ss-7- r0-If not be rscslvaC s. Ell
Ierce-
There can be 10 dJu5- a To the law
IN this u5.-5. bit We ta-L % see how
made . a9u-v 10 this case We
81 rg5 -r8e-S5azd THAT any comics
Son -rsls sr- I.sl ,,1zsuav 10 any third
uq---- on mar sn- confession made u7
-ha DESCENDANT we're offered The ties
---~--- NJ ET-CraS-zv VS. = IN rh=